Dunks Doubles Double Doping Summary

1259 Words6 Pages
The Journal of the American Board of Sport Psychology Volume 1-2007; Review, Morse, E. Submissions: www.americanboardofsportpsychology.org “Dunks, Doubles, Doping: How Steroids Are Killing American Athletics” by Nathan Jendrick (2006, The Lyons Press) Review by Eric Morse, M.D. Carolina Performance Raleigh, NC www.CarolinaPerformance.net “Dunks, Doubles, Doping: How Steroids Are Killing American Athletics” looks at the issues involving anabolic androgenic steroid use in the United States. It takes a more balanced view of steroid use. In the introduction, the question of why people use steroids is examined. To improve appearance, a quick fix in performance, fame, financial compensation, and placebo effect are all motivating factors for…show more content…
There are very few and vague references to scientific data. Because it is doubtful that any Institutional Review Board would approve of steroid studies at supraphysiologic doses, good study data is limited. However, poling bodybuilders is not good science. One bodybuilder he interviewed in his book intimated that bodybuilders are less than trustworthy. The only physicians the author interviews in his book involve the topic of genetic doping. How could you write a book on steroids and not interview Harrison Pope, M.D. from Harvard, the leading expert on anabolic steroids? Jendrick dismisses the medical consequences of steroid use, blaming the media for sensationalizing and spreading misinformation about steroids. While I agree that the media uses scare tactics to alarm the public and grab more ratings, his claim that 99% of testicular shrinkage returns to previous size after discontinuation of steroids is more irresponsible. When an athlete asks me if his “balls will grow back,” I’m honest. I say I don’t know. There’s little to no reliable data. Steroid dealers probably give out more misinformation than the media. Looking at the data to treat HIV-wasting syndrome, depression, or gonadal failure is not appropriate because they use approximate physiological doses, not the doses that many athletes
Open Document